CC Chargeback/Section 75 from banks perspective
Discussion
I'm looking for information on the Chargeback process from the Banks perspective (card issuer). I figured someone out there may have relevant work experience in a CC department or bank
Specifically around the card issuer asking the hold holder to obtain an Expert opinion/report on the products quality and faults.
I've been asked a few times recently to write such reports for random consumers who found me and I've helped them FOC because I am such a nice guy
In these cases there is an argument over wear and tear and what is a manufacturing defect, which is simple enough to address but I'm curious as to whether the requirement to furnish an Experts Report is mandatory. I think it might be given the CC issuer is not qualified to make an opinion on a defect and clearly a manufacturing defect is covered whereas wear and tear is not.
TIA
Specifically around the card issuer asking the hold holder to obtain an Expert opinion/report on the products quality and faults.
I've been asked a few times recently to write such reports for random consumers who found me and I've helped them FOC because I am such a nice guy
In these cases there is an argument over wear and tear and what is a manufacturing defect, which is simple enough to address but I'm curious as to whether the requirement to furnish an Experts Report is mandatory. I think it might be given the CC issuer is not qualified to make an opinion on a defect and clearly a manufacturing defect is covered whereas wear and tear is not.
TIA
When I had to initiate a S75 the CC company didn't ask for any expert reports. I supplied my information and photographs, the 'defendant' supplied a letter they'd clearly just made up, and the CC company made up their mind from the evidence supplied, much as a small claims judge does. Game set and match to Simpo.
I guess it depends on the complexity of the case, or how well the two sides' evidence compares.
I guess it depends on the complexity of the case, or how well the two sides' evidence compares.
Simpo Two said:
When I had to initiate a S75 the CC company didn't ask for any expert reports. I supplied my information and photographs, the 'defendant' supplied a letter they'd clearly just made up, and the CC company made up their mind from the evidence supplied, much as a small claims judge does. Game set and match to Simpo.
I guess it depends on the complexity of the case, or how well the two sides' evidence compares.
It would depend on the basis of the claim such as fault, quality, fit for purpose. What was the assertion you were making?I guess it depends on the complexity of the case, or how well the two sides' evidence compares.
Burwood said:
It would depend on the basis of the claim such as fault, quality, fit for purpose. What was the assertion you were making?
Breach of contract for an upholstery job. The supplier did half the job rather badly, then lost interest. Polite e-mails and a letter were ignored so I determined to get my deposit (about £1200) back on the grounds that the contract had not been completed. The comms trail and photos of the work did the job. Had they not done so I'd have taken it to small claims.It's not mandatory to get an expert's opinion. Section 75 has the net effect of making the creditor have the same liability for supply / quality etc as the supplier. However, a supplier will have better domain knowledge than the lender in a dispute. So basically if it's a clear cut dispute (in the lender's eyes), then we would make a decision based on borrower's assertions. If more complex, we have asked for an expert's opinion.
Ultimately, if a borrower doesn't agree with a lender's decision, they could take it to the Ombudsman or the courts. In these fora, the experts opinion would be helpful to the borrower's position (natch).
Ultimately, if a borrower doesn't agree with a lender's decision, they could take it to the Ombudsman or the courts. In these fora, the experts opinion would be helpful to the borrower's position (natch).
BeeBopp said:
It's not mandatory to get an expert's opinion. Section 75 has the net effect of making the creditor have the same liability for supply / quality etc as the supplier. However, a supplier will have better domain knowledge than the lender in a dispute. So basically if it's a clear cut dispute (in the lender's eyes), then we would make a decision based on borrower's assertions. If more complex, we have asked for an expert's opinion.
And of course the lender swipes the money back from the supplier, so they lose nothing (which is entirely fair as the problem wasn't their fault).BeeBopp said:
It's not mandatory to get an expert's opinion. Section 75 has the net effect of making the creditor have the same liability for supply / quality etc as the supplier. However, a supplier will have better domain knowledge than the lender in a dispute. So basically if it's a clear cut dispute (in the lender's eyes), then we would make a decision based on borrower's assertions. If more complex, we have asked for an expert's opinion.
Ultimately, if a borrower doesn't agree with a lender's decision, they could take it to the Ombudsman or the courts. In these fora, the experts opinion would be helpful to the borrower's position (natch).
Thanks for your input. Of course, in Simpo's example it's clear and in many cases, as you say, it will be. I know the differences between Chargeback and S75. I would envisage reports being requested when more subjective points have occurred and how they fit in with Fit for purpose/quality and faults. And on that i'm trying to gauge how common it is for Reports to be used by Card issuers. I would think it is common. The consumer goods I am looking at is ubiquitous, of high value and cards would be uses in the vast majority of cases. Ultimately, if a borrower doesn't agree with a lender's decision, they could take it to the Ombudsman or the courts. In these fora, the experts opinion would be helpful to the borrower's position (natch).
My experience is banks tend to side with the consumer anyway. Or at least they do with insurance.
We've given up defending chargebacks, we can compile all the evidence that the customer has simply changed their mind (outside the FCA cooling off period), or potentially even made a claim already, but we never win.
Our chargeback volume is small though, so we just don't waste the time and factor it in as the cost of doing business.
We've given up defending chargebacks, we can compile all the evidence that the customer has simply changed their mind (outside the FCA cooling off period), or potentially even made a claim already, but we never win.
Our chargeback volume is small though, so we just don't waste the time and factor it in as the cost of doing business.
grumbas said:
My experience is banks tend to side with the consumer anyway. Or at least they do with insurance.
We've given up defending chargebacks, we can compile all the evidence that the customer has simply changed their mind (outside the FCA cooling off period), or potentially even made a claim already, but we never win.
Our chargeback volume is small though, so we just don't waste the time and factor it in as the cost of doing business.
What might the cost be to say, a retailer that does 50m in sales. A tidy sum I would think We've given up defending chargebacks, we can compile all the evidence that the customer has simply changed their mind (outside the FCA cooling off period), or potentially even made a claim already, but we never win.
Our chargeback volume is small though, so we just don't waste the time and factor it in as the cost of doing business.
Burwood said:
grumbas said:
My experience is banks tend to side with the consumer anyway. Or at least they do with insurance.
We've given up defending chargebacks, we can compile all the evidence that the customer has simply changed their mind (outside the FCA cooling off period), or potentially even made a claim already, but we never win.
Our chargeback volume is small though, so we just don't waste the time and factor it in as the cost of doing business.
What might the cost be to say, a retailer that does 50m in sales. A tidy sum I would think We've given up defending chargebacks, we can compile all the evidence that the customer has simply changed their mind (outside the FCA cooling off period), or potentially even made a claim already, but we never win.
Our chargeback volume is small though, so we just don't waste the time and factor it in as the cost of doing business.
In a retail world I imagine it could be quite painful, especially if it was high value low margin products...
In my sector, DD guarantee chargebacks happen all the time.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
Saweep said:
In my sector, DD guarantee chargebacks happen all the time.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
A lot of companies bring this entirely upon themselves by auto-enrolling you in some subscription plan when you buy something or open/create an account, usually buried in some dark corner of the website or T&Cs that no-one ever looks at. This is of course totally intentional, knowing that most people will take the bait without bothering to read the 3000 pages of T&Cs and not notice the £10 going out of their account every month.People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
PH4555 said:
Saweep said:
In my sector, DD guarantee chargebacks happen all the time.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
A lot of companies bring this entirely upon themselves by auto-enrolling you in some subscription plan when you buy something or open/create an account, usually buried in some dark corner of the website or T&Cs that no-one ever looks at. This is of course totally intentional, knowing that most people will take the bait without bothering to read the 3000 pages of T&Cs and not notice the £10 going out of their account every month.People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
Simpo Two said:
grumbas said:
We're fortunate that we can usually reclaim the net cost from the insurer so are effectively only writing off our margin.
Thought surely if it's a regular occurrence your premiums will end up bigger than the payouts.Saweep said:
In my sector, DD guarantee chargebacks happen all the time.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
I'd be interested to know which sector this is?People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
We're thinking of offering payment for annual premiums by DD and my gut feel is it's going to be more admin and effort than sticking to cards for no uplift.
grumbas said:
Saweep said:
In my sector, DD guarantee chargebacks happen all the time.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
I'd be interested to know which sector this is?People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
We're thinking of offering payment for annual premiums by DD and my gut feel is it's going to be more admin and effort than sticking to cards for no uplift.
Saweep said:
grumbas said:
Saweep said:
In my sector, DD guarantee chargebacks happen all the time.
People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
I'd be interested to know which sector this is?People sign up to something, forget about it, then lie 6 months later that they never actually signed up. We have even had it where people have signed into a service every day then done the chargeback. Volume increases just before Christmas...
I advise my clients to just write them off, as mentioned, as a cost of doing business and move on. I can't think of a time when fighting has actually got a payment back.
It's very open to abuse.
We're thinking of offering payment for annual premiums by DD and my gut feel is it's going to be more admin and effort than sticking to cards for no uplift.
When I was doing motor insurance we had reasonable success passing DD debts to a collection agency (easier to chase being a compulsory insurance) as those we were on the hook for the whole debt not just our margin. Might be worth giving it a try depending on volume?
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff